A Mathematical Programming Formulation for the

Resource Minimization in Two Sided Assembly Line

Balancing Problem
AshishYadav1, Shashank Kumar2, Sunil Agrawal3
1,3
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
PDPM Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing, Jabalpur, India
2
Department of Industrial Engineering and manufacturing System,
National Institute of Industrial Engineering, Mumbai, India

Abstract: Two-sided assembly line balancing problem (TALBP) generally occurs in plants producing high volume large-sized
products such as buses or truckswhere, there is a process of installing two single stations in each position left and right side of
the assembly line for manufacturingthe product. The main aim of this paper is to develop a new mathematical model based on
resource optimization for two-sided assembly line balancing problem. The proposed mathematical model with the objective of
minimize the number of workstations when cycle time is fixed, with the addition of the resourcerestriction is applied to solve
two-sided assembly line case study problem.Assembly line balancing problem is well known NP hard problem that’s why an
exact solution approach is proposed to solve the problem. The case study problem is solved using a branch and bound
algorithm on lingo 17.0 solver.Computational results indicate that station line efficiency that is obtained by minimizing the
number of workstations and minimize the resources on mated stations is increased, which directly reduce cost of tools and
machine in the assembly line.

Keywords: Two-sided assembly line balancing problem (TALBP), Resource optimization, Lingo -16 solver, Case study problem

1. INTRODUCTION assembly line balancing (GALB) researcher introduced

many assumptions, these assumptions play a major role to
An assembly line is a production process where raw
solve real-world assembly line balancing problem. In two
material transfer through conveyer, different workers and
sided assembly line product can be manufactured or
machine perform work on it and finally raw material
assembled in parallel direction both at the left and right
converted into finished produced. The assembly line
sides of the lines. The task in two sided assembly line will
balancing (ALB) was introduced by Henry Ford in his
have direction restriction to perform because the use of both
automobile plants. Assembly line balancing problems
side of the line. The directions those are used in two sided
basically divide into simple and general assembly line
assembly line are left side (L), rightside (R), and either side
balancing problems. Simple assembly line problem
(E). Figure 1 shows the configuration of two sided assembly
(SALBP) is the most studied problem in the field of an
line balancing. (Yuan et al., 2015a; Li et al., 2016; Yuan et
assembly line and has many assumptions.In general
al., 2015b)

Left

Mated Station- 1 Mated Station- 2 Mated Station- 3 Mated Station- 4

Right

Fig. 1. Configuration of Two sided assembly line balancing

The two-sided assembly line was first introduced by that the sequence of the tasks within a workstation is not
Bartholdi in 1993, who conducted an iterative program with important in one sided assembly line but in two sided
balancing algorithm using the first fit heuristic. The major assembly line play crucial role for an efficient assignment of
difference between one sided and two sided assembly line is tasks. (Kucukkoc and Zhang, 2015; Delice et al., 2017)

ISBN: 978-93-86238-81-8 629

 Proceedings of ICIE 2019

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
TABLE 1: Literature review of two sided assembly line balancing

Objective Functions Constraints

Authors

Minimize number of mated stations

Minimize number of Workstations

Minimize production variance

Minimize cost (cost oriented)

Minimize line length (space)

Maximize work relatedness

Workload/task smoothness

Maximize production rate

Operational Direction
Minimize Cycle time

Maximize slackness
Minimize idle time

Synchronized task
Cycle time

Capacity

Yuan et al. 2015
Kucukkoc& Zhang 2015
Delice et al. 2017
Dashuang Li et al. 2016
Qiuhua Tang et al. 2016
Yuan, Zhang et al. 2015
Tang., et al. 2017
Chiang, et al. 2015
YılmazDelice et al. 2016
Li et al. 2017
Kucukkoc& Zhang 2014
Agpak&Zolfaghari 2015
Purnomo& Wee 2014
Fattahi et al. 2016
Delice et al. 2016
Sepahi et al. 2016
Tuncel&Aydin 2014
Purnomo& Wee et al. 2013
Kucukkoc and Zhang 2015
Deming Lei et al. 2016
Hu et al. 2018
Tapkan et al. 2016
Gansterer et al. 2017
Kucukkoc 2016
Yadav&Agrawal 2019
Distance
Position
Zoning
✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓
✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓

Table 1 indicate the literature review based on objective past authors. Thus, with the motivation of reducing the cost
function and constraints mentioned thatresource based two- of tools and machine is mathematical model is proposed in
sided assembly line has not yet attracted the attention of the this paper.TALB problems with the objective of minimizing

630
 Proceedings of ICIE 2019

workstation and resource optimization are very crucial for
the industries. The main aim of this work is to proposed
mathematical model for resource minimization on mated
stations for the feasible task allotment in two sided
assembly line balancing problem.
The remaining part of the paper are structured is as follows.
Paper section 3 provides a problem structure, mathematical
programming model of the two sided assembly line
balancing problem with its assumptions, objective function,
notations, decision variable and constraints. Section 4
indicates solution approach, case study problem data and its
computational results. Sections 5 of this paper are presented
conclusions and future work that is very helpful for the
researcher.

3. MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
Notation
Symbol Description
𝐵𝑗𝑘𝑟 Binary variable, which means that when resource r is configured to the k side of j workstation
1 if the resource is assigned to the workstation side
0otherwise
𝑋𝑖𝑗𝑘 Binary variable indicating if task i is assigned to mated-station (𝑗, 𝑘)
1 if task 𝑖 is assigned to station (𝑗, 𝑘)
0 otherwise
𝑊𝑖𝑝 Binary variable indicating precedence relationships among the tasks in the same station
1 if task 𝑖 is assigned earlier than task 𝑝 in the same station
0 if task 𝑝 is assigned earlier than task 𝑖 in the same station
𝑆𝑗 Binary variable indicating if station j is assigned with tasks
1 if there is any task assigned to work station 𝑗
0 otherwise
𝑓 Finish time of task 𝑖
𝑡𝑖
i Index of assembly task; i=1, 2, . . . I, where I represent set of all assembly tasks
j Index of station; j=1, 2, . . . J, where J represent set of all mated-stations
k Index of mated-station direction;
1 indicates a left direction
2 indicates a right direction
(j, k) Index of station𝑗 and the associated mated-station direction𝑘
P (i) Set of immediate predecessors of task i
Pa (i) Set of all predecessors of task i
P0 Set of tasks that have no immediate predecessors;
P0 = {i ∈I |P (i)=∅}
S (i) Set of immediate successors of task i
Sa (i) Set of all successors of task i
Ti Processing time of task i
A A very large positive number
CT Cycle time
C (i) Set of tasks whose operation directions are opposite to task i’s operation direction;
TL if i ∈TR, TR if i ∈TL
∅ if i ∈TE
K (i) Set of indicating the preferred operation directions of task i;
1 if i ∈TL, 2 if i ∈TR
1or2 if i ∈TE
TL Set of tasks performed at a left side
TR Set of tasks performed at a right side
TE Set of tasks performed at either a left or a right side
𝑊𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum number of workstations
𝑅𝑚𝑎𝑥 Maximum number of Resource

631
 Proceedings of ICIE 2019

Wmax | R| (1)
Min   B jkr
j =1 kK ( i ) r =1

Objective function equation (1) represents, minimize the amount of resources and minimize number of workstations. This
objective function signifies the addition of square sum of maximum number of workstation and square sum of maximum
number of resources with the task assignment in left or right side on each mated station.

 X − A B  0
iM jkr
ijk jkr
(2)

j  J , k  K (i ), r = 1, 2.. | R |
S
jJ
j  Wmax (3)


jJ kK ( i )
X ijk = 1 (4)

i  I

gJ kK ( h )
g  X hgk   
jJ kK ( i )
j  X ijk (5)

i  I − P0 , h  P(i )
Ti f  CT (6)

i  I
    (7)
Ti f − Thf + 1 −  X hjk  + A  1 −  X ijk   Ti
 kK ( h )   kK (i ) 
i  I − P0 , h  P(i ), j  J
Tpf − Ti f + (1 − X pik ) + A  (1 − X ijk ) + A  (1 − Wip )  Tp (8)

i  I , p  r | r  I − ( Pa (i)  Sa (i)  C (i); i  r , j  J , k  K (i )  K ( p)

Ti f − Tpf + (1 − X pik ) + A  (1 − X ijk ) + A  (Wip )  Ti (9)

i  I , p  r | r  I − ( Pa (i)  Sa (i)  C (i); i  r , j  J , k  K (i )  K ( p)

Ti f  Ti (10)

i  I

iI kK ( i )
X ijk − A  S j  0 (11)

j  J
S j = 0 or 1 (12)

jJ
X ij1 = 0 or 1 (13)

j  TL ; j  J
X ij 2 = 0 or 1 (14)

j  TR ; j  J

632
 Proceedings of ICIE 2019

X ijk = 0 or 1 (15)

j  TE ; k = 1, 2
Wip = 0 or 1 (16)

i  I , p  r | r  I − ( Pa (i)  Sa (i)  C (i); i  r

Constraints (2) ensure that at least one task i using resource
r to the k side of j workstation.Constraints (3) ensure that
total number of workstations cannot exceed a given
maximum number of workstations. Constraint (4) states that
all tasks are assigned to only one station. Constraint (5) is
the precedence constraint. Constraint (6) requires that the
finish timeof tasks assigned to each station does not exceed
the cycle time. Constraints (7) to (9) are two sided assembly
line sequence constraint. Constraint (7) represents sequence
constraint. Constraints (8) and (9) represent that two tasks
do not have precedence relationship. Even if there is no
precedence relationship restriction, constraint (7) would be
satisfied when they are assigned to the same mated-station.
Constraints (8) and (9) become active only when the two
tasks 𝑖 and𝑝 are assigned to the same mated-station (𝑗,). If i
𝑓
is assigned earlier than p, then constraint (8) becomes𝑇𝑝 −
𝑓 𝑓 𝑓
𝑇ℎ ≥ 𝑇𝑝 ; if not, then constraint (9) becomes 𝑇𝑖 − 𝑇𝑝 ≥
𝑇𝑖 .Constraint (10) ensuresthat the processing time of tasks
assigned to each station does not exceed the finish time of
tasks.Constraint (11) ensures that every station has at least
one task assigned to it.Constraints (12)- (16) are binary
constraint of decision variables.
4. COMPUTATIONAL RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Two-sided assembly line balancing problem solved by exact
solution approach provide exact solution those are feasible
for the case study problem. The case study is done using
Lingo 16.0 solver with Intel Core i5, 3.20 GHz processor
and 4GB of RAM.
4.1 Case Study Data
This section shows ABC company data to solve two-sided
assembly line balancing problem (TALB) problem as
depicted in Table 2. In this table, there are 16 tasks with
their preferred side (right, left and either) as well as
immediate predecessor and task time for both the resources
A and B.

TABLE 2: Case study problem data

Task no Task Side Task Time Task Immediate predecessors Resources (Machine)
1 E 6 3, 4 A
2 E 5 5 B
3 L 2 6 A
4 E 9 7 B
5 R 8 7 A
6 L 4 8 B
7 E 7 8, 9, 10 A
8 E 4 11 B
9 R 5 12.13 A
10 R 4 13 B
11 E 6 14, 15 A
12 L 5 15 B
13 E 6 16 A
14 E 4 - B
15 E 3 - A
16 E 4 - B

633
4.2 Computational Results of Case Study Problem
This section indicates the result of case study problem
wheretwo resource machine A and machine B are
utilized.Theoretical minimum number of workstations can
be calculated by the formula mentioned below, Where (X) +
indicates the smallest integer greater than or equals to X.
Cycle time is calculated according to the demand and
available time.
𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑎𝑠𝑘 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 +
=[ ] (17)
𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
Theoretical min. number of station for case study Problem
82
= [ ]+ = 6
15
Figure 2 indicate that in mated station-1, task 2 and task 4
are allocated on the left side of mated-station for machine B,
similarly tasks 1 and task 5 are allocated to the right side of
mated station for machineA in the feasible task allotment of
case study problem. Total 4 numbers of mated stations is
utilized to assigned 16 tasks. Optimal task allotment
indicates that there are six units of machineA and four units
of resource B and overall 10 units are utilized.

Machine-B Machine-A Machine- (A, B) Machine-B

Left
2 4 7 3 6 8 13 12 14 16
1 5 7 9 10 8 13 11 15
Right
Machine-A Machine-A Machine- (A, B) Machine-A
M.S. Mated Station 1 Mated Station 2 Mated Station 3 Mated Station 4

Fig. 2. Optimal task allotment in case studyproblem

Results indicate that the total numbers of mated stations are
less as compared to the theoretical minimum number of
stations for the case study problem. Based on the equation
(17), theoretical minimum number of workstations for the
case study problem is calculated which is higher as
compared to the total number of mated stations.Total
number of mated stations are4which means that the solution
is also optimal in terms of station assignment.Here cycle
time is 15for the case study problem.The performance times
of the tasks, idle time and the resources (machine) are
presented in Table 3.

TABLE 3: Performance evaluation of case study problem

No of Mated stations Task Direction Task Resources (Machine) Idle Time

1 Left 2, 4 B 1
Right 1, 5 A 1
2 Left 7, 3 A 6
Right 7, 9 A 3
3 Left 6, 8, 13 A, B 1
Right 10, 8, 13 A, B 1
4 Left 12, 14, 16 B 2
Right 11, 15 A 6

5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE
In this paper, author’s present a mathematical programming
model with the objective function of minimizing resources
and minimizing the number of workstations for given cycle
time with resource optimization to solve case study problem
of two sided assembly line. The proposed mathematical
programming formulation is able to solve the numerical
problem, with good solutions therefore authors applied this
approach to solve case study problem. This will help the
industry to utilize the manpowerin an efficient manner and
to eliminate the extra use of resources.
In future work a multi-objective model and mixed model
can be developed with resource optimization for two sided
assembly line balancing and resource optimization based
mathematical model can also be applied with the stochastic
approach. This mathematical model can be applied with new
meta-heuristic methods such as whale optimization and grey
wolf optimization to get the optimal solution for the two
sided assembly line balancing problem. According to the

ISBN: 978-93-86238-81-8 634

 Proceedings of ICIE 2019
industrial aspect such as resource optimization, more
realistic constraints like distance constraint can be very
helpful for future work in two sided assembly line
balancing.
REFERENCES
Agpak, K., & Zolfaghari, S. (2015). Mathematical models
for parallel two-sided assembly line balancing problems and
extensions. International Journal of Production Research,
53 (4), 1242-1254.
Chiang, W. C., Urban, T. L., & Luo, C. (2016). Balancing
stochastic two-sided assembly lines. International Journal
of Production Research, 54 (20), 6232-6250.
Delice, Y., Aydogan, E. K., Ozcan, U., & Ilkay, M. S.
(2017). A modified particle swarm optimization algorithm
to mixed-model two-sided assembly line balancing. Journal
of Intelligent Manufacturing, 28 (1), 23-36.
Delice, Y., Aydogan, E. K., Ozcan, U., & İlkay, M. S.
(2017). Balancing two-sided U-type assembly lines using
modified particle swarm optimization algorithm. 4or, 15 (1),
37-66.
Delice, Y., Kızılkaya Aydogan, E., & Özcan, U. (2016).
Stochastic two-sided U-type assembly line balancing: a
genetic algorithm approach. International Journal of
Production Research, 54 (11), 3429-3451.
Fattahi, P., Samoei, P., & Zandieh, M. (2016). Simultaneous
multi-skilled worker assignment and mixed-model two-
sided assembly line balancing. International Journal of
Engineering-Transactions B: Applications, 29 (2), 211-221.
Kucukkoc, I., & Zhang, D. Z. (2014). Mathematical model
and agent based solution approach for the simultaneous
balancing and sequencing of mixed-model parallel two-
sided assembly lines. International Journal of Production
Economics, 158, 314-333.
Kucukkoc, I., & Zhang, D. Z. (2015). A mathematical
model and genetic algorithm-based approach for parallel
two-sided assembly line balancing problem. Production
Planning & Control, 26 (11), 874-894.
Li, D., Zhang, C., Shao, X., & Lin, W. (2016). A multi-
objective TLBO algorithm for balancing two-sided
assembly line with multiple constraints. Journal of
Intelligent Manufacturing, 27 (4), 725-739.
Li, Z., Dey, N., Ashour, A. S., & Tang, Q. (2018). Discrete
cuckoo search algorithms for two-sided robotic assembly
line balancing problem. Neural Computing and
Applications, 30 (9), 2685-2696.
Purnomo, H. D., & Wee, H. M. (2014). Maximizing
production rate and workload balancing in a two-sided
assembly line using Harmony Search. Computers &
Industrial Engineering, 76, 222-230.
Sepahi, A., & Naini, S. G. J. (2016). Two-sided assembly
line balancing problem with parallel performance capacity.
Applied Mathematical Modelling, 40 (13-14), 6280-6292.
Tang, Q., Li, Z., & Zhang, L. (2016). An effective discrete
artificial bee colony algorithm with idle time reduction
techniques for two-sided assembly line balancing problem
of type-II. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 97, 146-
156.
Tang, Q., Li, Z., Zhang, L., Floudas, C. A., & Cao, X.
(2015). Effective hybrid teaching-learning-based
optimization algorithm for balancing two-sided assembly
lines with multiple constraints. Chinese Journal of
Mechanical Engineering, 28 (5), 1067-1079.
Yadav, A., & Agrawal, S. (2019, May). Minimize Idle Time
in Two Sided Assembly Line Balancing Using Exact Search
Approach. In Proceedings of the 2019 International
Conference on Management Science and Industrial
Engineering (pp. 220-227). ACM.
Yuan, B., Zhang, C., & Shao, X. (2015). A late acceptance
hill-climbing algorithm for balancing two-sided assembly
lines with multiple constraints. Journal of Intelligent
Manufacturing, 26 (1), 159-168.
Yuan, B., Zhang, C., Shao, X., & Jiang, Z. (2015). An
effective hybrid honey bee mating optimization algorithm
for balancing mixed-model two-sided assembly lines.
Computers & Operations Research, 53, 32-41.
635